SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: IS IT ACHIEVING THE DESIRED AIMS? Debbi D. Brock, Berea College Susan D. Steiner, University of Tampa

Transcription

1 SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: IS IT ACHIEVING THE DESIRED AIMS? Debbi D. Brock, Berea College Susan D. Steiner, University of Tampa Debbi Brock Berea College CPO 1863 Berea, Kentucky Electronic copy available at:

2 ACADEMIC ABSTRACT This study s purpose was to uncover the challenges and best practices in the field of social entrepreneurship. We examined definitions of social entrepreneurship; the most widely used cases, articles and textbooks; and the most popular pedagogical approaches in 107 social entrepreneurship courses. Our findings suggest that faculty have done an excellent job of utilizing powerful pedagogical methods like service learning. In addition, the majority of courses covered opportunity recognition, innovation, acquiring limited resources, measuring social impact and building sustainable business models as core elements of social entrepreneurial activity. The greatest challenge involved teaching students about scaling social innovations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The term social entrepreneurship was first coined in the 1980 s by Bill Drayton, founder of ASHOKA. Since then, social entrepreneurship has gained attention as a significant field that shows how critical societal issues can be addressed through the innovation, persistence, and sustainable results associated with entrepreneurship. Academia is contributing to this movement by introducing students to unique business models that make a positive contribution for the public good. World renowned universities such as Harvard, Stanford, and Berkeley were the first to offer courses in social entrepreneurship in the 1990s. Europe quickly followed suit. Since then, there has been an explosion of courses in the U.S. and abroad. In addition, there are growing number of majors and minors in the field. The intent of this research is to elucidate ways that faculty can help students be the change you wish to see in the world by uncovering the challenges and best practices in the field of social entrepreneurship. We focused on the stated and working definition of social entrepreneurship that faculty use in their course designs; the most widely used cases, articles and 2 Electronic copy available at:

3 textbooks in the field; and the influence of service learning and experiential learning in designing courses. Our research analyzed 107 social entrepreneurship syllabi in the U.S. and abroad. While we do not presuppose that this is an exhaustive list, it is the greatest number of courses analyzed to date. Our preliminary findings suggest that faculty have done at excellent job of utilizing powerful pedagogical methods like service learning to advance social entrepreneurship education. Well over half the faculty address innovation and innovative ideas, recognizing an opportunity, obtaining resources for social entrepreneurship ventures, building a sustainable business model, and outcomes measurements. Issues of scale and replicability were less frequently tackled by professors and were addressed in only 36% of the syllabi reviewed. INTRODUCTION The Growth in Social Entrepreneurship Courses Student demand led Greg Dees to offer the first course in social entrepreneurship at Harvard University in the mid 1990 s. Several other highly respected U.S. universities e.g., Stanford, Columbia, and Berkley quickly followed suit. The first documented European course was co-taught by Maximilian Martin from the University of Geneva in Switzerland and Pamela Hartigan from the Schwab foundation in To our knowledge, the oldest documented research on U.S. universities involved in social entrepreneurship education was conducted in 2002 by the ASHOKA foundation. The organization identified ten schools: Columbia University, Georgetown College, Harvard University, Northwestern University, Stanford University, UCLA, University of California Berkley, University of Michigan, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, and Yale University. 3

4 The first edition of the Social Entrepreneurship Handbook was published in January 2004 to document the U.S. based schools actively teaching social entrepreneurship (Brock, 2004). The twenty-three schools highlighted included: Berea College, Brigham Young University, Boston University, Case Western University, Columbia University, Duke University, Georgetown University, Harvard Business School, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mercer University, New York University, Prescott College, Roberts Wesleyan College, Seattle University, Stanford University, Sterling University, University of California Berkley, University of Maryland, University of Notre Dame, and University of Pennsylvania and European universities include Oxford University in England, University of Geneva in Switzerland, and University of Navarra in Spain (Brock, 2004). Universities abroad have been at least as active as their U.S. counterparts. For example, Oxford University s Said Business School was the first to offer a concentration in social entrepreneurship for MBA students. Oxford s Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship remains at the cutting edge of the field by supporting research, by hosting thought leaders at their colloquia, and by bringing together the largest worldwide gathering of people interested in social change at their annual Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship. The Tata Institute of Social Sciences has developed the first MBA in social entrepreneurship in India, which will be offered for The courses are designed to create an innovative and sustainable approach for addressing age old and emerging problems of the poor, disadvantaged and deprived. The pedagogy is based on fifty percent classroom experience and fifty percent practice based learning. Perhaps the most innovative course model to date is the Asian Institute of Managements 18 month social entrepreneurship program targeted to social entrepreneurs who only graduate if the organization they manage meets their goals. 4

5 Topics Requiring Coverage The vast majority of universities that include social entrepreneurship as part of their curriculum offer only one or two courses. As a result, social entrepreneurship courses are typically designed to provide an overview of the field instead of focusing on one or two elements. What topics should be included in these overviews? We believe that a good starting point for this inquiry is the definition of social entrepreneurship. A number of researchers and practitioners have attempted to define social entrepreneurship. As with entrepreneurship, there is an array of viewpoints. For the purpose of this study, we conducted a content analysis of twelve definitions of social entrepreneurship from some of the most cited researchers and organizations in the field (see Appendix A). The seven most common elements in these definitions were addressing social needs/problems that make a positive contribution the community, innovation, scaling a social venture, resource acquisition to accomplish the organization s mission, opportunity recognition, creating a sustainable business model and measuring outcomes. Table 1 presents the frequency with which the most common phrases/concepts were used. 5

6 TABLE 1 Concepts Cited Most Often in Social Entrepreneurship Definitions Social Problems/Needs In Dees (1998b) seminal research, the social mission is explicit and central to social entrepreneurs. Social value creation is steered by the organization s social mission (Alter, 2007, Dees, 1998b). Holding the mission at the nucleus of social entrepreneurship education will ensure that faculty are able to cultivate socially responsible entrepreneurs committed to mission impact. Opportunity Recognition Opportunity recognition is widely accepted in entrepreneurship definitions as a critical component to entrepreneurial activity (Dees & Anderson, 2003, Shane & Venkataraman, 2000, Timmons, 1999). The same is true for social entrepreneurship. Where others see problems, social entrepreneurs see opportunities (Dees, 1998b). Students of social entrepreneurship need to 6

7 know how to recognize, assess and exploit opportunities, thereby transforming a good idea into a purposeful organization. Innovation A critical component of social entrepreneurship is fostering innovation (Alvord et al, 2004; Austin et al, 2006; Dees and Anderson, 2002; Haugh, 2006, Light, 2006; Mair and Marti, 2006; Nichols 2007). This is heartening to the research team because innovation is a key differentiator between non-profit management and social entrepreneurship. Bill Drayton from ASHOKA is frequently quoted as saying, Social entrepreneurs are not content just to give a fish, or teach how to fish. They will not rest until they have revolutionized the fishing industry." Innovations can come in a variety of forms not just in terms of new products and services, but in terms of the ways that the organization operates and delivers value to its constituencies. Scalability Scalability is a key component of social entrepreneurship because social ventures are measured in terms of their expected social value (Perrinni & Vurro, 2006). Social entrepreneurship is not about local, non-replicable solutions. The focus is on overall societal needs and problems, on how to maximize social change and improve social conditions. Social entrepreneurs are visionaries who seek to transform society through creating social ventures that can be scaled up and replicated in multiple settings through dissemination, affiliation and/or branching (Alvord et al, 2004, Dees et al, 2004; Bornstein, 2004). Teaching scale ensures students understand the difference between a small community enterprise and a social entrepreneurial organization that makes long term impact on society. Resource Acquisition 7

8 Resourcefulness is a critical component to social entrepreneurship. As Dees noted, social entrepreneurs [act] boldly without being limited by resources currently in hand. Instead, they are adept at seeking out resources to achieve their organization s social purpose. They understand how to combine and leverage resources to create value (Mair & Marti, 2006). Preparing students to understand how to create strategic partnerships, obtain financial resources, secure human and physical capital is crucial to build social organizations with limited resources. Sustainable Business Model Developing a business model that can be sustained overtime is important for an organization, especially an organization that balances creating economic value and a social mission. The business model was made popular by Hamel in his book, Leading the Revolution, which integrated developing customer relationships, building a core strategy, cultivating strategic resources and creating a value network (Hamel, 2000). Teaching the business model concept provides social entrepreneurship students with a tool to communicate the long-term value of the organization. Measuring Outcomes Measuring impact of any organization is important but for the social entrepreneur, measuring performance is often critical to achieving sustainable, scalable results. Because social ventures typically require the support of those whom they do not serve, proving their impact is imperative to their attracting human, physical and financial resources. At the same time, measuring the impact of a social venture is one of the great challenges facing the actionoriented social entrepreneurs (Mair & Marti, 2006). Students of social entrepreneurship need to become facile in a variety of measurement approaches, ranging from the double or triple bottom 8

9 line, social return on investment, social impact analysis, to the balanced scorecard for social ventures (cf., Roberts Enterprise Fund, 2000; Kramer, 2005). THE STUDY: Analysis Approach and Data Collection Content Analysis of Course Syllabi Content analysis of syllabi is a common methodology for evaluating the philosophies, topics, and pedagogic approaches of programs across universities. For example, Johnson et al. (2003) studied auditing course syllabi over the past decade to uncover changes in content and pedagogy. Strauss et al. (1999) reviewed stated course learning objectives and assignments to identify common topics and targeted skills in e-commerce marketing courses. Stephens and O Hara (2001) assessed the level of consistency in course attributes and content for core information technology courses across AACSB accredited schools. In this research, a content analysis of course descriptions, learning objectives, and assignments presented in course syllabi was performed to evaluate the stated and working definition of social entrepreneurship that the faculty member use in their course designs; the most widely used cases, articles and textbooks in the field; and the influence of service learning and experiential learning in designing social entrepreneurship courses. We recognize that a syllabus is an imperfect approximation of course content and course conduct. No written document captures everything that is experienced first-hand. For example, due to the concise nature of some syllabi, critical course components and concepts, which are not mentioned in writing, may be communicated orally in the classroom. Another possibility is that faculty may provide supplementary written materials about in-class and outside class assignments that further elucidate their perspectives and key learning points. In spite of these limitations, syllabi are considered valid documentation of faculty members intentions regarding 9

10 course aims, activities, and assignments (Steiner & Rozen, 2004; Sullivan & Maxfield, 2003), and we expected them to provide us with valuable insights. Data Collection Procedures Our research included two separate data collection methods. First, we searched the Internet for undergraduate and graduate courses that had the phrase social entrepreneurship in either the course title, course description, or course objectives. Second, we actively solicited syllabi from faculty in the U.S. and abroad that were listed in entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship, and nonprofit management databases and listservs. The sources for names included a proprietary database of faculty members interested in social entrepreneurship, postings on the University Network for Social Entrepreneurship faculty, the International Council on Small Business and the Small Business Advancement National Center, listservs such as the Social Enterprise Knowledge Network in Latin America, the Social Entrepreneurship Handbook faculty, the United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, the Academy of Management, the National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators Association, the Skoll World Forum 2007 faculty attendees, the 2007 Aspen Institute Beyond Grey Pinstripes survey of schools, African Business Schools, and the Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools (AACSB) faculty listed on the website who teach social entrepreneurship courses. Due to increased student demand, traditional entrepreneurship courses are adding social entrepreneurship modules. The researchers determined that the syllabi had to focus on social entrepreneurship and serving a social mission/social need/community impact to be included in the final database. Once the documents were collected, we culled approximately fifteen percent of the sample after we judged that these courses were inappropriately categorized as having a 10

11 social entrepreneurship focus. Typically, these courses were on nonprofit management, corporate social responsibility, or functional business areas such as social marketing or advanced finance with one module on microfinancing. Sample Analyzed We analyzed 107 social entrepreneurship syllabi from 72 colleges and universities. Sixty-eight percent of these courses are held in U.S. universities. The remainder are held at universities in Asia, Europe, Latin America and the Near East. Seventy-five percent of the courses reviewed are offered in colleges of business. (This was disappointing as the authors made a concerted effort to obtain syllabi from other disciplines, such as sociology, international studies and engineering.) The remaining twenty-five percent are spread across a variety of disciplines ranging from economics to public policy (see Table 2). TABLE 2 Schools in which Social Entrepreneurship Courses Reside University Area % of Syllabi Business 75% Public Policy/Nonprofit Management 14% Social Science (Economics, Communications) 8% Sciences (Engineering, Medicine, etc.) 1% Social Services (Education, Social Work, etc.) 1% Other 1% 11

12 Coding Scheme for Topics Covered A college course received a check mark for a content category if the factor was deemed present to any extent. Given the exploratory nature of this study, no judgments were made as to the quality of delivery. Each syllabus was rated independently by two of the authors. The authors practiced by coding ten syllabi independently and then comparing their assessments. Based on the questions and issues that arose during this practice session, descriptions of the content categories were refined. The authors then coded another ten syllabi independently and then compared their assessment to determine if content category descriptions warranted further refinement. Given their high level of agreement when coding the next batch, the authors coded the remaining 87 syllabi. Coding agreement ranged from eighty-five percent to a hundred percent depending on the content area classification. Discrepancies were discussed and resolved to the authors mutual satisfaction. Findings Course Materials Until May 2007, with the Sage Publications release of Entrepreneurship in the Social Sector, there were no academic textbooks on social entrepreneurship. Therefore, it came as no surprise that there were a wide variety of books assigned by faculty. Of the 150 different books listed in the syllabi reviewed, the trade publication, Changing the World through Social Entrepreneurship by David Bornstein, was required most. Two other popular books were Strategic Tools for Social Entrepreneurs: Enhancing the Performance of your Enterprising Non- Profit and Enterprising Nonprofits: a Toolkit for Social Entrepreneurs, both of which target practitioners. The 2006 Oxford Press publication Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of 12

13 Sustainable Social Change, which is a compilation of writings from leading academics, policy makers, and practitioners, is starting to be used in a number of MBA courses. The average number of articles assigned per course is 12, with an astounding 800 different articles. The one article that is assigned in just under half of the courses is The Meaning of Social Entrepreneurship by Greg Dees, which was published in The top fifteen articles in alphabetical order by title are presented in Table 3. TABLE 3 Top Fifteen Articles Assigned by Instructors (in alphabetic order by author) Title Going to Scale Enterprising Nonprofits, HBR The Meaning of Social Entrepreneurship Social Enterprise: Private Initiative for the Common Good HBS The Process of Social Entrepreneurship Note on Starting a Nonprofit Venture The U.S. Nonprofit Capital Market Should Nonprofits Seek Profits A Report from the Good Ship SROI Runaway world: How Globalization is Reshaping our Lives Virtuous Capital: What foundations can learn from venture Capitalists Philanthropy's New Agenda: Creating Value Effective Capacity Building in Nonprofit Organizations The New Landscape for Nonprofits The New Work of the Nonprofit Board The Pitfalls of Profits Author Bradach Dees Dees Dees Dees and Anderson Dees and Oberfield Emerson Foster and Bradach Gair Giddens, Anthony Letts, Ryan and Grossman Porter and Kramer Ryan Ryan Taylor and Holland Weisbrod and Burton 13

14 We also identified 240 different cases that are being used in the classroom. Faculty select cases in a variety of ways. Some faculty use the Millennium Development Goals as the framework for identifying and teaching cases in social entrepreneurship. Other faculty chose cases based on social issues, course topical areas or proximity of the social entrepreneur to attend class a guest speaker for a live case. Given the fact the same case was never assigned in more than eight different courses, there seems to be no case classic. Topics Covered in Syllabi Based on our analysis of the most common defining characteristics of social entrepreneurship, the seven essential topics in a social entrepreneurship course are addressing social needs/problems that make a positive contribution the community, innovation, scaling a social venture, resource acquisition to accomplish the organization s mission, opportunity recognition, creating a sustainable business model and measuring outcomes. Because addressing social needs/problems is at the heart of social entrepreneurship, all syllabi in the sample were required to include this element. (If any had been found not to include this element which was not the case those syllabi would have been excluded from the analysis.) Table 4 presents the frequencies with which each of these topics are covered in the courses reviewed. 14

15 TABLE 4 Seven Essential Topics of a Social Entrepreneurship Course The topic of resource acquisition was covered in over eighty percent of all syllabi. The topics of measuring outcomes (primarily SROI), opportunity recognition, sustainability, and innovation were addressed in about the same percentage of syllabi, approximately sixty percent. Scaling the social venture was the least covered concept in social entrepreneurship syllabi, with faculty devoting at least one session to this topic in a little over one-third of the courses. The prevalence of resource acquisition and leverage is not surprising given the emphasis placed on distinguishing between the old charitable giving model and the new income generation models for social ventures. The work of Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus, who advanced the concept of microfinancing with the establishment of Grameen Bank, may also have contributed to the popularity this topic. In addition, accounting and finance are an integral part of the business school mindset, and most social entrepreneurship courses reside in business schools. As with resource acquisition, the emphasis on measuring performance and outcomes may be due to the fact that these courses typically reside in business schools. While the emphasis on 15

16 outcomes assessment (versus process assessment) is a relatively new approach in the non-profit world, it is an age-old concept in the for-profit world that has always paid attention to the bottom line. Many of the measurement techniques and frameworks for social venture have been adapted from the business world. As already noted, the concepts of opportunity recognition and innovation are essential elements of entrepreneurship, so it not surprising that faculty would include them in their courses on social entrepreneurship. The limited coverage of scalability may also be due to the fact that scale is not a requirement for entrepreneurship. However, it is a unique defining element of social entrepreneurship. As faculty teaching social entrepreneurship courses, we need to embrace the long term impact of scaling social ventures and teach the concepts of scaling out and replication. Teaching Pedagogy When developing a social entrepreneurship course, faculty are provided an array of teaching methods to choose from. These options include traditional lectures, class discussions, the case method, and hands-on projects that range from interviewing/shadowing social entrepreneurs to writing a business plan for a fictitious social venture to providing expertise and volunteer time to existing organizations interested in social change. One of the most popular options for teaching civic mindedness and social responsibility over the past several decades had been service learning. Learn and Service America website a leading organization supporting service learning education, defines service learning as a teaching and learning strategy that integrates meaningful community service with instruction and reflection to enrich the learning experience, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities. (Learn and Serve, 2007). At the heart of service learning is experiential learning 16

17 that actively engages students in a project which provides a service to the community and a connection to course content. The diversity of service learning options in the courses include writing a social business plan for a social enterprise, consulting with a social venture, developing an earned income strategy for a social organization, starting a social venture, interning or writing a grant proposal for a social organization. Our findings indicate that seventy-five percent of faculty teaching social entrepreneurship are assigning service/experiential learning projects to give students hands-on experience, with a significant portion of the overall course grade attributed to the project (approximately 30%). The five examples in Table 4 are presented as leading-edge experiential learning practices in the field. TABLE 4 Experiential Learning Models in Social Entrepreneurship Courses University Course Title Level Course Information Asian Institute of Management Master in Entrepreneurship for Social and Development Entrepreneurs G SE* The mission of AIM s Social and Development Entrepreneurship Program is to build a critical mass of social entrepreneurs who can make a difference for the poor and marginalized in the Asian marketplace. Its pioneering Master in Entrepreneurship for Social and Development Entrepreneurs is an 18-month real time course where social entrepreneurs are coached to define five-year strategic plans and to implement innovations to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of their social enterprises. (Provided in course syllabus) Berea College Entrepreneurship for the Public Good U According to the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), the best hope for stabilizing and diversifying Appalachia s economy lies in the creation and expansion of businesses that provide jobs, build local wealth and contribute broadly to economic and community development which led to the creation of Entrepreneurship for the Public Good (EPG) program. The EPG program is a model through the two summer program where students learn how small businesses and 17

18 University Course Title Level Course Information nonprofit organizations employ responsible practices to provide jobs and build healthy communities. Through the program, students are actively engaged with nonprofit and for-profit organizations and create value for the organization through a community project. (Brock, 2006) Harvard University and Stanford University Social Entrepreneurial Collaboratory G The Social Entrepreneurship Collaboratory is a new learning lab launched at Harvard s Kennedy School of Government. The university based incubator for the next generation of leading social entrepreneurs fuses theoretical and practical approaches. The SE Lab is a laboratory workshop where student teams create and develop plans for U.S. and international social entrepreneurship initiatives. Proposed initiatives may be new entities or innovative projects, partnerships, and/or other arrangements that will have an impact on existing organizations and social outcomes in the U.S. and internationally. As appropriate, students may decide to pursue funding, and the implementation of a pilot project. (Bloom, 2006) Syracuse University Emerging Enterprise Consulting U/G The program is a life-changing experience, where students help and learn from disadvantaged entrepreneurs in the Black townships near Cape Town, South Africa. Student consulting teams work with small businesses over six weeks to help make the ventures sustainable operations. They are expected to identify and prioritize the key needs of the entrepreneur and make meaningful progress in addressing some of the priority needs. The entrepreneurs being assisted are special individuals who have overcome a history of apartheid, limited education, and severely constrained resources to create small enterprises. This program is available to upper level undergraduate students and graduate students regardless of major. The key requirements are a strong work ethic, emotional maturity and a desire to make a difference. The focus is less on analysis and more on producing tangible deliverables.( Universidad de los Andes Asesoria a Emprendedores Sociales (AES) G/SE* The program is build upon groups of three: a student, a social entrepreneur, and an Ashoka consultant. Students participate in the structuring a project identified by the social entrepreneur, and serve as a bridge between the consultant and the entrepreneur. The entrepreneurs, 18

19 University Course Title Level Course Information work with the students to identify their needs and implement the recommendations that arise from the projects. The Ashoka consultant directs the project and voluntarily works with the team coordinating and supervising activities. The team searches for equilibrium and integration among the economic and social dimensions of the social enterprise; adding to the economic viability of the social projects and the social impact of the projects. (Provided in course syllabus) * Note: The program targets actual social entrepreneurs for this 18 month graduate program. Role of Practioners Faculty are strongly cognizant of the role that social entrepreneurs play in advancing social entrepreneurship as a field of study and a career pursuit. As one faculty members said, it is the people on the ground who are doing the work that we need to inspire our students. Approximately seventy-five percent of faculty invite guest speakers to the classroom. Social entrepreneurs also are brought in as adjunct professors, albeit on rarer occasions. For example, David Jordon, the President and CEO of Seven Hills Foundation, teaches the new MBA course at Clark University; and Bill Shore, founder of Share our Strength, teaches at New York University. So What? Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the research was faculty commitment to action in social entrepreneurship. In a field lacking in theory and empirical studies, faculty who embrace social entrepreneurship tend to focus on service and/or experiential learning activities for course assignments. Students are challenged to create tangible value for a social venture in their community through these projects. Social entrepreneurs that partner with colleges and universities benefit from students who add value to their organizations. 19

20 We recommend that future research include lessons learned by students. Are students learning outcomes different based on the methodological approach a professor takes? For example, which in-class experiences have the greatest impact? Which hands-on projects? What insights can we gain from a comprehensive comparison of courses across different disciplines? Across the world? We also recommend that faculty teaching social entrepreneurship recognize the defining characteristics of social entrepreneurship and that they cover the seven essential topics in their courses - addressing social needs/problems, innovation, scaling a social venture, resource acquisition, opportunity recognition, sustainable business model and measuring outcomes in order to prepare future leaders in the field. The ultimate question is what course content and designs are most apt to persuade students to develop a social mindset and become service-oriented leaders of tomorrow. The real test of our work is the choices and actions of our graduates. How many will choose a career path working for a socially entrepreneurial enterprise or starting their own social venture within one year, five years, ten years, and twenty years after graduation? In the short-term, mid-term, and long-term, to what extent will they positively impact the triple bottom line? 20

21 APPENDIX A Social Entrepreneurship Definitions Author(s) & Year Ashoka Austin, J., Stephenson, H. & Wei-Skillen, J. (2006) Bornstein, D. (2003) Dees, J.G. (2001) Johnson (2000) Light (2006b) Definition Social entrepreneurs are individuals with innovative solutions to society s most pressing social problems. They are ambitious and persistent, tackling major social issues and offering new ideas for wide-scale change. Social entrepreneurship is an innovative, social value-creating activity that can occur within or across the nonprofit, businesses or government sector. A path breaker with a powerful new idea, who combines visionary and real-world problem solving creativity, who has a strong ethical fiber, and who is totally possessed by his or her vision for change. Social entrepreneurs play the role of change agents in the social sector, by: Adopting a mission to create and sustain social value (not just private value), Recognizing and relentlessly pursuing new opportunities to serve that mission, Engaging in a process of continuous innovation, adaptation, and learning, Acting boldly without being limited by resources currently in hand, and Exhibiting heightened accountability to the constituencies served and for the outcomes created. Social entrepreneurship is emerging as an innovative approach for dealing with complex social needs. With its emphasis on problemsolving and social innovation, socially entrepreneurial activities blur the traditional boundaries between the public, private and non-profit sector and emphasize hybrid model of for-profit and non-profit activities. A social entrepreneur is an individual, group, network, organization, or alliance of organizations that seeks sustainable, large-scale change through pattern-breaking ideas in what or how governments, nonprofits, and businesses do to address significant social problems. 21

22 Author(s) & Year Mair, J. & Marti, I. (2006) Martin, R.L. & Osberg, S. (2007) Nichols, A. (2007) PBS The New Heroes Schwab Foundation Skoll Foundation Thompson (2002) Definition Social entrepreneurship: Innovative models of providing products and services that caters to basic needs (rights) that remain unsatisfied by political or economic institutions. The social entrepreneur should be understood as someone who targets an unfortunate but stable equilibrium that causes the neglect, marginalization, or suffering of a segment of humanity; who brings to bear on this situation his or her inspiration, direct action, creativity, courage, and fortitude; and who aims for and ultimately affects the establishment of a new stable equilibrium that secures permanent benefit for the targeted group and society at large. Social entrepreneurship entails innovations designed to explicitly improve societal well being, housed within entrepreneurial organizations which initiate, guide or contribute to change in society. A social entrepreneur identifies and solves social problems on a large scale. Just as business entrepreneurs create and transform whole industries, social entrepreneurs act as the change agents for society, seizing opportunities others miss in order to improve systems, invent and disseminate new approaches and advance sustainable solutions that create social value. What is a Social Entrepreneur? A pragmatic visionary who achieves large scale, systemic and sustainable social change through a new invention, a different approach, a more rigorous application of known technologies or strategies, or a combination of these. The social entrepreneur as society s change agent: a pioneer of innovation that benefits humanity. Social entrepreneurs are ambitious, mission driven, strategic, resourceful and results oriented. People with the qualities and behaviors we associate with the business entrepreneur but who operate in the community and are more concerned with caring and helping than making money. 22

23 References AACSB International. (2004). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards from business accreditation. Tampa, FL: AACSB International. Alter, S.K. (2007). Social enterprise models and their mission and money relationships. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. In Nicholls, A. (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Alvord, S. Brown, L. and Letts, C. (2004). Social entrepreneurship and societal transformation: an exploratory study, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(3): , Austin, J., Stephenson, H. and Wei-Skillen, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, Different, or Both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1): Birch, K. and Whittam, G. (2006). The role of the social economy, social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in sustainable regional development. Centre for Public Policy for Regions. Discussion paper 12. Bloom, G. (2006). The Social Entrepreneurship Collaboratory (SE Lab): A university incubator for a rising generation of social entrepreneurs. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. In Nicholls, A. (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Bornstein, D. (2004). How to Change the World: Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Borzaga, C. and Defourney, J. (2001). The Emergence of Social Enterprise. New York: Routledge. Boschee, J. (1998). Merging mission and money: A board member s guide to social entrepreneurship. Washington D.C.: The National Center For Nonprofit Boards. Boschee, J. and McClurg, J. (2003). Toward a better understanding of social entrepreneurship: some important distinctions. Social Enterprise Alliance. Retrieved December 29, 2006 from Brock, D. (2006). Entrepreneurship for the public good pedagogy. Retrieved on November 11, 2006 from Brock, D. (2004). Social Entrepreneurship Handbook. University Network. Retrieved on retrieved on November 11, 2007 from Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership. 14(4):

24 Dees, J.G. (2002), Blurring Sector Boundaries: Serving Social Purposes through For-Profit Structures. North Carolina: Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship, Duke University, Fuqua School of Business. CASE Working Paper Series No. 2: Dees, J.G. (1998a). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, January-February, 76(1): Dees, J.G. (1998b), The meaning of social entrepreneurship. Stanford University: Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership. Retrieved on October 1, 2007 from Dees, The social enterprise spectrum: Philanthropy to commerce. Harvard Business Review. April, Dees, J.G. (1994). Social Enterprise: Private initiatives for common good. Harvard University: Harvard Business School Press. Dees, J.G., Anderson, B. and Wei-Skillern, J. (2004). Scaling Social Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 4(1) 4: Dees, J.G., Anderson, B. and Wei-Skillern, J. (2002). Pathways to social impact: Strategies for scaling out successful social innovations. Retrieved on November 1, 2007 from Dees, J.G., Emerson J. and Economy, P. (2002). Strategic Tools for Social Entrepreneurs: Enhancing the Performance of your Enterprising Non-Profit. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Dees, J.G., Emerson J. and Economy, P. (2001). Enterprising Nonprofits: A Toolkit for Social Entrepreneurs, New York: John Wiley & Sons. Drayton, B. (2006). The citizen sector: Becoming as entrepreneurial and competitive as business. California Management Review, 44(3): Drucker, P.F. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: Harper Collins. Emerson J. and Twersky. F. (1996). New Social Entrepreneurs: The Success, challenge and lessons of nonprofit enterprise creation. San Francisco: Roberts Foundation. Emerson, J., (2003). The blended value proposition: integrating social and financial returns, California Management Review, 45(4): Harding, R. (2006). Social Entrepreneurship Monitor United Kingdom London: London School of Business. Hamel, G. (2000). Leading the Revolution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 24

25 Hibbert, S.A., Hogg, G. and Quinn, T. (2002). Consumer response to social entrepreneurship: The case of the Big Issue in Scotland. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 7(3): Johnson, S. (2000), Literature Review on Social Entrepreneurship. Edmonton: Canadian Centre for Social Entrepreneurship. Johnson, E. N., Baird, J., Caster, P. and Dilla, W.N. (2003). Challenges to audit education for the 21st Century: A survey of curricula, course content, and delivery methods. Issues in Accounting Education, 18(3): Jones, D. and Keogh, W. (2006). Social enterprise: A case of terminological ambiguity and complexity. Social Enterprise Journal, 2(1): Kramer, M.R. (2005). Measuring innovation: Evaluation in the field of social entrepreneurship. Foundation Strategy Group. Learn and Service America. (2007). Service Learning. Retrieved on September 8, 2007 from Light, P.C. (2006a). Searching for social entrepreneurs: Who they might be, where they might be found, what they do. ARNOVA Occasional Paper Series, 1(3): Light, P.C. (2006b). Reshaping social entrepreneurship. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 4(3): Mair, J. and Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction and delight. Journal of World Business, 41: Martin, R. L. and Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, (5)2: Mort, G.S., Weerawardena, J. and Carnegie, K. (2003). Social entrepreneurship: Towards conceptualization. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1): Mosher-Williams, R. (Ed). (2006). Research on social entrepreneurship: Understanding and contributing to an emerging field. ARNOVA Occasional Paper Series, 1(3). Nicholls, A. (2006). Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nicholls, A. and Cho, A.H.. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: the structuration of a field. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. In Nicholls, A. (Ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press,

26 Oster, S.M., Massarsky, C.W. and Berinhacker, S.L. (Eds.) (2004). Generating and Sustaining Nonprofit Earned Income. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Perrini, F. and Vurro, C. (2006). Leveraging social change through entrepreneurship. In Perrini, F. (Ed.) The New Social Entrepreneurship: What Awaits Social Entrepreneurial Ventures? Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Roberts Enterprise Fund. Social return on investment collection. Retrieved on November 2, 2007 from Sagawa, S., Segal, S. (2000). Common interest, common good: Creating value through business and social sector partnerships. California Management Review, 42(2): Seelos, C. and Mair, J. (2005). Social entrepreneurship: Creating new business models to serve the poor. Business Horizons. 48(3): Seelos, C. and Mair, J. (2004). Social entrepreneurship: The contribution of individual entrepreneurs to sustainable development. University of Navarra, Working Paper 553. Shane, S and Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research, Academy of Management Review, 25 (1): Shaw, E. (2004). Marketing in the social enterprise context: Is it entrepreneurial?. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 7(3): Shockley, G., Frank, P. and Stough, R. (2002). Toward a theory of public sector entrepreneurship. Paper presented at the NCIIA 7th Annual Meeting: Big Ideas in a Small World. Boston, MA. Steiner, D. and Rozen, S. D Preparing tomorrow s teachers: An analysis of syllabi from a sample of America s schools of education. In Hess, F., Rotherham, A., and Walsh, K. (Eds.) A Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press, Stephens, C. S. and O Hara, M. ( 2001). The core information technology course at AACSBaccredited schools: Consistency or chaos? Journal of Education for Business, 76(4): Strauss, J., Mitchell, T. and Bennett, J. (1999). Similarities and differences in university Internet marketing courses. In Young, J. Green R. and Gilbert R. (Eds.) Society for Marketing Advances 1999 Proceedings. Atlanta: Society for Marketing Advances: Sullivan, C. J. and Maxfield, M. G. ( 2003). Examining paradigmatic development in criminology and criminal justice: A content analysis of research methods syllabi in doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 14(2):

27 Sullivan M, G., Weerawardena, J. and Carnegie, K. (2003). Social Entrepreneurship: Towards Conceptualization. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1): Thompson, J. (2002). The world of the social entrepreneur. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(5): Thompson, J., Alvy, G. and Lees, A. (2000). Social entrepreneurship a new look at the people and the potential. Management Decision. 38(5): Timmons, J. A. (1999). New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21 st century. Fifth edition. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Wei-Skillen, J., Austin, J., Leonard, H. and Stephenson, H. (2007). Entrepreneurship in the Social Sector. London: Sage Publications. 27